Truth in a world of Lies and stupidity

Category: Government of Canada

I’ve watched the media frenzy on this story of this Terrorist and it is absolutely disgusting how people can support Justin Trudeau’s decision to pay out ten and a half million dollars to this man.

I will start with why I think the payout itself is disgusting. This man, was indoctrinated into Islamic extremism by his family. He was trained to kill, from a young age. At the age of 15 years old he could legally join the terrorist organization, who at the time was bent on destroying western civilization. He killed an unarmed soldier who was a medic, and blinded another. Those are the ones we know of and he confessed to.

Even here in Canada we will send a child to trial as an adult if the crime fits need. This was no child. He built bombs, killed soldiers and even to this day, has shown absolutely no remorse for what he has done. On the contrary. He sued our government, for cash, because of his treatment, at the hands of our allies, who is the enemy of the United States, Canada and all the other western nations. For the treatment he received while in Guantanamo Bay Prison.

Oh but he was tortured you hear from supporters. No, no he wasn’t. He wasn’t water boarded. He didn’t get bamboo shoots shoved under his finger nails. He was deprived of sleep.

How this came to be “torture” was back when he was incarcerated, some officials from our country went to go see him, and he told them he wasn’t being allowed to sleep normally and was tired. The Canadian officials came back and claimed he was being tortured. The government struggled and worked with the Americans to get him released back into Canada. It did take awhile, but he was allowed to come back to Canada and as an apology to him and his alleged torture, he wasn’t sent to our prison. He was free and considered time served. This was supposed to be the end of it.

Omar decided, no no, I was tortured and the government did nothing so my charter rights were violated. He sued and won. The Supreme Court agreed. Then Omar sued for 200 million, from the Canadian government and it was in it’s third appeals process in the court system when Justin Trudeau, the ultimate SJW/Progressive Islamic Supporter, decided to settle with Ten and a Half Million dollars, and to make matters worse, he tried to hide it from the public and made sure he was out of the country when it was leaked, so he could hide from the media, with the hope that the frenzy would die down.

This is why I’m disgusted. I’m disgusted by Omar because he to this day has yet to apologize for what he did. He has shown no remorse for what he has done. No, it’s quite the opposite, he is claiming he is the victim. He is the victim from the Americans, our government, and so therefor we the taxpayer must pay this convicted and self confessed terrorist taxpayer dollars and make him a millionaire.

This is disgusting and so anti Canadian in this whole situation. I have been hearing from people trying to justify this support and oh he is the victim here. Etc, etc, etc. And everything brings bile to my throat.

Here is my message to the supporters of Omar the Terrorist.

YOU are the problem. YOU are the reason why people die. You are the equivalent of a nazi sympathizer. Supporting self confessed terrorists and trying to justify giving them money is why I hate people like you. Yes I hate you. I hate you because I realize that if you support something like this so vehemently and see nothing wrong with this, shows me that your moral compass is skewed to the direction of evil. Yes, evil. Islamic Terrorists and Islamic terrorism is evil and shouldn’t be tolerated, let alone supported, by anyone who claims to be Canadian or American or anyone who comes from a westernized nation.

I’m a gay man. Islamic Terrorists are not our friends. They want me dead. Simply for being gay. They want all of us dead if you don’t want to join their religion. There is no trying to justify their actions, trying to pay them money for some imagined rights that they believe to have been violated.

Abortion. Such a touchy subject and one that many women will scream about. In fact with the current american election looming, the subject has come up due to Hilary’s opinion that the unborn have no rights in law until they are born. Which means, in her eyes, that a child can be ripped apart via abortion right up until the time labor starts.

This has caused a debate on abortion to renew again. I’ve seen this debate happen numerous times over the past forty years. However, now with age comes wisdom and understanding.

The understanding that “my body my right” is false. I will list my reasons why.

Let’s begin with conception. Life starts there. The mother’s egg is dormant until the father’s sperm penetrates the egg and gives it the spark of life and energy it needs to start cell reproduction.

One of the arguments from women is that they give life or create life. Technically this is incorrect. At best you can call a woman an incubator. They carry and gestate that child in their body but the “spark” that created that life, came from the father.

The cells reproduce and form a child. During that process there are many stages. Many argue that there is no “life” until there is a heartbeat or a brain etc. This really is a strawman argument. Since as I stated the spark started at inception.

Now, with that being said many argue that the fetus can be aborted right until week 31-35. In Canada, this is 24 weeks. This is what a fetus looks like at that time.

Now I don’t know about you, but this does not look like a bunch of cells that get scraped off the uterus wall. Yet, the abortions can and do happen this late.

So the argument of “My Body, My Right” is false. It disregards the life of the child as nothing. So I can understand how some could see it as murder.

If anyone has watched the Videos from the investigation into Planned Parenthood, you would have seen the horrors that they present. Selling the aborted baby parts for profit. The staff separating brain, legs, arms as if they were never human life.

Then we have father’s rights. Or rather, the lack of reproductive rights. Many of the people who argue for abortion always mention that “If the father didn’t want a child, they shouldn’t have had sex”. This argument is without any kind of reason, coherent thought or logic. The reason being is, the same logic can be applied to the women. “If she didn’t want a child she shouldn’t have had sex”.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not against abortion completely. I firmly believe there should be allowances in law for it. Such as cases of women or girls getting pregnant from rape, or incest. Or in medical needs, such as her life is in danger from the pregnancy. Those to me seem to be reasonable.

We have had over 50 years in Canada of proper sex education, women have access to more than twenty kind of contraceptive options. Everyone, and I mean everyone knows the pill is not 100 percent and yet we still have unwanted pregnancies.

So maybe it’s time ladies to stop blaming men for your pregnancy? Men have 3 options to them. A condom, Abstinence or a vasectomy. The power, the choices and the rights are all yours. So if you get pregnant and it is unwanted, then to me, it is your fault. At least, ninety percent on you.

As, I have written, men do not have rights when it comes to being a father or not. You scoff and will rant, but it is true.

Men have zero choice in becoming a father. Once the sperm, penetrates the egg and cell division starts then women have all the power and the choice in society. If a woman gets pregnant here are her choices.

1. She can choose to abort. 2. She can choose to keep the child. 3. She can choose to give the child up for adoption. 4. She can choose to not name the child’s father on the birth certificate. 5. She can choose to force the father to pay child support. 6. She can choose to let the father give up his so called “parental rights as father”. 7. She can choose to deny the father any visits to the child.

All the choices are hers. This is why, I think the laws in this country concerning abortion need to take a more balanced approach to, well, every aspect.

We need to have this discussion as a nation. People need to be honest and less selfish about it and that will start with you ladies, cause we men, don’t have the rights.

I have discussions with people both online and in real life about current affairs, politics, activism, and more. Many people are passionate about what they are discussing and as such, I really don’t mind when the discussion or debate gets heated. If both people understand that the discussion or debate is just that, then you can have a heated debate without taking it personally.

However, many people out there are unable to cope with this idea and do take things personally. And those people tend to be the worst. Especially some of the commentators on social media sites. Instead of saying something constructive or conducive to the debate or discussion at hand, they of course, resort to name calling or attacking someone for stating something they have every right to state. And instead of being civilized they become these lunatics with an axe to grind.

After decades of being active online, I can spot these people very easily. They try to come off as some sort of moral authority on their opinion and attack someone by using slurs that sound racist and bigoted. Then when you confront them they invariably turn their ire on you when you defend yourself or a friend from them. When that doesn’t work and their argument falls apart they then try to slander you to try to get you to move away from the topic at hand in hopes that you will defend yourself from their offensive and then finally claim victim status saying you are the aggressor while they are the poor victim.

This happens almost daily online with people. They think that being offended by something they see online gives them the automatic moral right to attack people, and when they are defended against, they pretend to be victims of abuse online. There are many people out there who do this. I see many feminists, SJWs and liberals who do this.

New Disorder….??

This is what I call the Infantile Victim Disorder or IVD. You get an IVD when you have a warped set of beliefs that cause you to believe there is a mysterious patriarchy made up of old white men out to get you. Or that you think you are superior to the other person due to their body parts. And even due to a skin tone that is not considered Caucasian.

Symptoms include, being “triggered“. Using the word Problematic, and telling men they have male privilege or the other variant if you are a person of another color, having white male privilege.

Other symptoms may include: Obesity, Poverty, Neon color in hair, getting undressed in public to march against rape, yelling and spitting on men at university, submitting false rape claims, false reports of sexual assault. Raping men. Being the aggressor in domestic violence. Lesbianism.

If you suspect you have IVD, please go see a psychiatrist immediately. Usually sufferers of IVD also have Bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder and project their issues and blame others for problems that don’t exist or are the cause of the sufferer’s own actions.

To Justin Trudeau, his Cabinet, and the current sitting members of Parliament,

I am going to step away from the main virtue that Canadian people are known for, and that is being nice. I’m angry. I am angry at you. All of you. You failed. You failed in your duty. The main one to which all people believe in, when it comes to a democratic nation.

The duty of protecting it’s people. You failed. You failed in helping our Canadian citizens John Ridsdel and Robert Hall.

While our Prime Minister was busy with PR stunts and photo opportunities, these men, our own citizens had their lives cut short by people who have no respect for freedom, democracies, religions or life. They pleaded from their government to intervene in some way. You stood by and did nothing. They asked you in the very real terror to do your duty to protect them, and you were silent.

“To the Canadian government, I’m told to tell you to meet the demand,” Hall said in the video. “I don’t know what you’re doing but, you’re not doing anything for us. John is being sacrificed, his family has been decimated, and I’m not sure why or what you’re waiting for.”

Then afterwards, Justin you went on camera and gave a speech, which amounted to nothing. It meant nothing. You did nothing to prevent this tragedy, nothing to protect our citizens, our brothers. You had the power, the authority but you stood by and did nothing.

You took a policy of standing by and doing nothing after decades of terrorism and threats to free people of the world. Instead you sit back and kill the people you have a duty to protect and wring your hands and give your condolences to the families of the dead who have to live with the loss and the knowledge of the horrible ways these victims died.

It’s time you, and I mean a all of you stand up and do your duty to the people of canada and do something to stop these terrorists from doing this again to any Canadian. It’s time you did your duty. If you cannot, or will not, protect our people when these types of things happen then all of you need to step down from your positions and let real men and women, who have the courage to stand up against terrorists who kidnap and kill our people.

Instead of spending your time in front of the press, flashing love signs and promoting feminism and spending billions each month, do your job.

The policy of not paying ransoms has failed. It can be proven with the evidence of the bodies of these men, and every single man, woman and child this has happened to over the past 20 years.

If a police officer stands by, and does nothing and remains silent, while he watches a citizen be killed by another he can be considered an accessory to the crime of murder. You, the cabinet and the members of parliament are guilty of being accessories to acts terrorism.

We all have rights. Many of those rights are violated today under the guise of “for your safety” or for “public safety”. Like the era of Hitler when he came into power, pro police and pro authority supporters encourage this. They praise police when they very obviously have broken the law or violated someone’s individual human rights.
Today I read a very vague article in my local newspaper, that lead me to believe the person mentioned in it had her rights violated. Which of course prompted a heated debate as I seemed to be the only one who recognized this.

Now, after reading the article it does not say why she was in the hospital or why she was angry. So we can only speculate. I am someone who presumes innocence until proven guilty, so I will presume she is innocent of any crime.

Which leaves only a few reasons for her to act this way. The most logical and basic is that she was forced there against her will, got angry and spit on the cop. Who then proceeded to charge her for getting a little wet.

The comment section heated on social media when I mentioned that her rights had most likely been violated by the cops, the medical professions and possibly the paramedics if they used them.

This caused a stir. People stood up and commented that the cops was assaulted, but really were they?

If you are taken against your will to someplace you didn’t want to go, just because you were drunk, isn’t that kidnapping? I would think so. In fact the Legal definition of kidnapping is:

Kidnapping

Thecrime of unlawfullyseizingandcarryingaway a person by force orFraud, or seizinganddetaining a personagainsthis or herwillwith an intent to carrythatpersonaway at a latertime.

This is what they did. That is again assuming that she didn’t want to go and didn’t commit any crimes while drunk.

Many would say that it was for her safety and that makes it right. Actually no it doesn’t. The only person who can make that decision is the person in question. The only time that doesn’t apply is when they are unable to due to mental illness or they are unconscious.

In the 90s, I lived in BC and at that time there was a serious heroin problem. 100% pure heroin was being sold on the streets and anyone who would inject themselves with it would overdose and die within 3o minutes. This was such a major problem that they had paramedics driving ambulances in the alleys and looking for unconscious drug addicts.

When they found a conscious drug user, they would offer help, and if they person said no they legally could not do anything. If that happened they would wait until that person lost consciousness and then act.

When I asked the authorities about that, they said that by law they cannot force a medical treatment against someone’s will unless they were unable to make that decision themselves. That is to me the right thing to do.

Now back to the woman in the article, if she was drunk and they transported her to the hospital and she refused medical treatment, then forcing her to have it would have made the medical staff at fault. And the police trying to “deescalate” the situation would not have made it any better. No means no. And since the police in this age are not known to be gentle or nice , we can only assume their idea of deescalate was to use force on her to hold her down. To which the only thing the woman could do to defend herself would be to spit on the cop.

Some paramedics piped up and stated they deal with drunk people all the time who don’t want help and have to “deal” with the violence all the time. Same with some nurses at the hospitals. Here is my message you to and to any of these people who think they are helping someone. “NO MEANS NO.” Drunk or sober, you do not have the right to force a medical treatment, force someone to go somewhere, without their consent or against their will. NEVER! If they attack you in anyway it is within their right to defend themselves because regardless of your intent, you are violating their rights and attacking them”.

Can people understand this? If a drunk driver is held accountable for their actions of getting in the vehicle and driving while drunk then they have the ability to say no to unwanted help. If you violate this and take them to a hospital and try to perform a medical procedure, any medical procedure then you are at fault and not the drunk person.

Pass this on and share this. The more people that get educated on rights, then maybe we can fix this from happening to others.

We are now seeing generations of people coming out of our education system, less educated, and less able to think critically than when they went in. As a result, we are seeing these same people deny the definition of words that are listed in dictionaries and going with their own. Case in point, is when you point out the dictionary definition of feminism to someone, and they say “well that’s YOUR definition. My definition is …..”.

This is the idiocy that I am speaking of. It has gotten so bad that these people cannot even think critically about what they are even saying, and follow the cult mentality of the ideology.

Here is a comparison of a religion, to feminism.

Religion have a god and a devil.

Feminism has well, Feminism and he evil Patriarchy.

Religion has the oppressed and the oppressors.

Feminism has the ever victims called Women and Men are oppressing them. Even male babies and men who die protecting them.

Religion has an ideology that has a list of sins.

Feminism has this too. Women are sinners if they support men who don’t follow feminism, who decide to be housewives, etc.

Men are born in sin. Are all potential rapists and aggressors.

Religion has a persecution complex.

So does feminism. Patriarchy keeps women down!

Religion has a Pope!

Feminism has Justin Trudeau! (Irony)

The comparisons can go on and on. The current feminist pope… I mean mouthpiece, recently proclaimed that Liberals should be considered a movement, and not a political party. He is blurring the lines purposely. He wants people to start thinking of the liberal party as a movement because this way it makes it easier for the feminist movement to control it more openly instead of via puppet strings.

We need to stop this and shout it down. Everywhere, and every-time we see it. We may not all agree on political topics, but identity politics should not be part of government. I can vividly see a future where men are forced to sit to pee and getting angry at a woman or speaking against a woman becomes a crime if these people continue and have their way.

Keep fighting for freedom people. Liberals/Feminism is not freedom, but a cage.

What happens when your home is no longer your castle? What does it feel like when you, get told that you have no rights on who enters your home or when?

I found out today that in Canada, we do not have any rights to our property. At least the government believes we don’t. In the interest of safety, they have created laws that empower their agents to think they can tell us that they can, without any warrant, to enter our homes.

Now the reason may sound reasonable to some, but the reason does not matter to me. It is the rights they trample over.

Today during a neighborhood association meeting, we had a representative from the fire department. She was quite nice and I had a great respect for that branch. Until today that is. She had been there to represent the local fire department and with a smile, informed us that the Carbon Monoxide detectors had almost been installed in all the homes in my area, except for a few. She then proceeded to inform us that in those homes that they were unable to gain access to, they would ticket the homeowners and basically enter the home, without a warrant to install these Carbon Monoxide detectors/inspect the home.

Of course being who I am, this raised huge red flags to me. Our homes are supposed to be our sanctuaries and no one, should be allowed to enter except in emergency or with a warrant if suspected of a crime.

According to the fire department however, they can and will enter people’s homes if the home owners refuse them entry when they come knocking for the carbon monoxide detectors.

The legal implications for this is huge. The first implication is that you have no say on who enters the home if they are a government agent. The police are supposed to get a warrant to enter someone’s home, but the fire department doesn’t if there is no apparent emergency?

If the fire department can be granted these powers, with no due process, then what else has the Canadian governments created?

Needless to say this made me instantly angry. Here was a government representative, telling us homeowners that we had no say. No authority. Well needless to say that I promptly informed her that no law can decide who enters my home and If they tried I will fight them in court and defend my home from intrusion, because without a warrant, I consider anyone entering my home as a home invader. Uniform or not. She then tried to threaten me with getting a police officer to come in to “explain” the law to me.

This kind of heavy strong arm tactic is the same type that dictatorships use and if you don’t capitulate they throw you in jail or kill you. No cop can enter your home without your permission or a warrant, or unless there is some emergency like a 911 call from inside the home, fire, or break in.

They cannot, ever enter without a warrant. To do so, they would be violating your rights to privacy and your home. Think of all those people who have been victims of a home invasion and imagine the home invaders being the government. The feelings you would feel would be no different. Many people who have experienced this from cops or any government agency have described their feelings after as the same as those who have had a home invasion by criminals. No difference.

Now, someone at the meeting cited that police can enter with just cause, and the answer is a swift no they can’t. They need to get a warrant to enter. If they have “just cause” then they can bring that to a judge, while just cause is not usually enough to get an arrest warrant, it can be enough to justify a warrant to enter someone’s home, but to give any other agencies sweeping powers to enter your home with any due process is a violation of a person’s rights.

We need to stop letting these people get away with this. We need to stop being so passive when it comes to government and law enforcement.

Maybe they are misunderstanding the law? Maybe they have been told by their superiors they can do this and let the lawyers handle any blowback? Who knows, but this is not what living in a free country means.

I will say this over and over, until feminism ideology is treated by society, exactly what it is, which is an ideology of hatred of men. Period. People are leaving feminism ideology in droves but it won’t be finished unless it is legally recognized as a hate group. Much like Neo-Nazi’s are treated.

I’ve heard the arguments from pro-feminists who give this world view description of it that is pure fantasy and not based on reality. Even from the so called men, who support feminism, have been brainwashed in this ideology of hate, that they cannot even see it.

Here are some common arguements and lies that pro-feminists use to defend the hate group ideology.

1. Feminism is about equality for all.

Yes we have all heard that one, and we all know it isn’t true. The dictionary is a book that has the definitions of words in the english language and it tells a different definition.

The doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

Notice the difference feminists? No? Let me “mansplain” for you.

The first definition devotes the energy to supporting women’s rights only. It operates on the assumption they are treated less than men.

Egalitarianism however, is one of equality, for everyone. Not based on gender, not based on race, or sexuality. In other words, it doesn’t give special treatment for one group.

Back to common arguments in the defense of feminism:

2. Feminism cares about men!

No actually it doesn’t. It is a sexist, bigotted and homophobic ideaology. It is a facist movement that was co-oped back in the 60s, by angry women. They teach in gender studies courses the division of people. It classifies them and puts them into victim groups with white men being the oppressors.

The interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, class, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage:through an awareness of intersectionality, we can better acknowledge and ground the differences among us’

The whole definition is about separating and categorizing based on oppression. This ideology is taught in gender studies courses and taught this is still happening in western culture and society. It teaches that we need to label ourselves and plot our victim hood on some scale of privilege vs oppression.

The final thing about intersectionanilty is that is doesn’t include white males. Not one feminist, or their supporting men, will say that white men are an oppressed class and part of this intersectionanility. In fact they will go out of their way and angrily pronounce that white men are the most privileged people in society, who oppress everyone else.

3. Feminism loves men:

Sure they do, because this is their main scapegoat for all their projection of self hate.

Here is a classic example of blaming men by a blogger who wrote an article about why the world needs feminism.

The gist of the article is that men are still the oppressors and still I will follow up on this article with a list of my own to counter this one because this is the type of nonsense we need to speak out against.

4. Feminism isn’t about hate. It’s about love!

I heard this one by so many feminists, that it makes me so angry every-time I hear it. It also shows they are down syndrome retarded in their thinking. Here are some quotes by feminists that show the love!

“All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman.”
Catherine MacKinnon

“I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He’s just incapable of it.”
Former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan.

“Men’s sexuality is mean and violent, and men so powerful that they can ‘reach WITHIN women to fuck/construct us from the inside out.’ Satan-like, men possess women, making their wicked fantasies and desires women’s own. A woman who has sex with a man, therefore, does so against her will, ‘even if she does not feel forced.’
Judith Levine, (explicating comment profiling prevailing misandry.)

“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.”
Andrea Dworkin; from her book Ice and Fire .

“I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire.”
Robin Morgan

MALE:…represents a variant of or deviation from the category of female. The first males were mutants…the male sex represents a degeneration and deformity of the female.

MAN:…an obsolete life form… an ordinary creature who needs to be watched…a contradictory baby-man…

I could go on and on but you get the idea. Feminism is about the hatred and subjugation of men. It teaches men they are evil and that women are best people.

It is time we denounce feminism, challenge it’s conceptions and presume it is gospel truth and fight the hatred of it.

We have allowed feminist ideology to infect society in such a way it is now affecting everyone as a whole. It is a lie that teaches hate. It infects our schools, our government, our jobs, even our homes.

Stand up. Say no to feminism and challenge anyone who supports it. It will be the only way we can stop this hate group.

I recently got into a debate on this (again), and for some reason people cannot fathom that hate speech laws are a form of censorship. Worse yet. We have the mayor of Ottawa Jim Watson, who has been in his office since the beginning of time, who openly now tweets and states that he is for the stiffing of speech because he finds it “vile”.

I tweeted him and stated that wanting to censor free speech is wrong, and he responded by calling me vile for supporting the guy who wants to open a dialog about the rape laws.

Reasonable people understand that rape is bad. We all know this. No one condones rape. The problem lies with the idea and definitions of rape.

Feminist supporters think rape can be this magical thing that can happen at any point. Let me explain.

They (Liberals and Feminists) believe that (I’ve written about this before),

A man and a woman who BOTH get drunk, BOTH consent to sex and have sexual intercourse is rape. Why? A woman is apparently unable to consent while drunk.

A woman who goes home with a strange man, gets drunk, takes drugs and gets naked, has sex with the strange man but doesn’t remember having sex has been raped.

A woman who consents to having sex even when sober and then regrets the experience a week later, has been apparently been raped.

Do you notice the trend here? Women are not responsible for their actions but men are despite being equal in things.

So this Return of Kings guy is calling for a debate and discussion about the rape laws if it occurs in your own home.

I get what he is saying and while I don’t agree entirely, with much of what he says, I understand that freedom of speech means being able to talk about things that people may find vile or abhorrent without repercussions from government.

As far as Mayor Jim Watson is concerned the idea of questioning the idea of rape laws is abhorrent. This is the type of people in power and have been in power for a very long time.

I tweeted back the mayor stating the differences, that hate is the calling for 90% of men to be castrated or killed via the #killallmen hashtag. Or the Drinking Male Tears meme which is common among rich white sorority girl feminists who do not understand basic concepts of freedom of speech.

Using these laws to shut down talk and discussion that you “FEEL” is wrong is not a valid reason. Free Speech is a double edged sword. I’m gay and I’ve heard the debate and discussion when gay marriage and even back when gays were not accepted as they are now. I may not have liked what was being said but I never wanted to stop people from speaking their minds on subjects and having rational discussions.

Jim Watson, Justin Trudeau, if a woman or a man goes home with a stranger, and has spent a night flirting and implying they are interested in having sexual intercourse, and they go to either one’s home, get drunk or even not. Get naked and have sex, and one party regrets it the next day, that is not rape. Neither is it when you get drunk, and get naked in someone else’s bed. That is called implied consent. I know this concept is foreign to you but it is a real thing. Penalizing someone for wanting to speak their mind on the subject or banning someone from speaking is called censorship.

And censorship is a form of oppression and hate. Hate of true freedom.

First I would like to thank you for reading my open letter. I know that you are busy, so I will try to keep this short.

Justin Trudeau does not represent Canada. Yes I know, he is the PM of the crown corporation of Canada, and claims he is the representative. However, I will state this. He does not represent the values, nor the ideals of the majority of Canadians.

How can he be the PM then you ask? Good question. First, and foremost, the majority didn’t vote for him. Believe it!

The problem with our voting system is our leaders are chosen years in advance. The media manipulates their audience with back and forth promotions to make it seem like it is a fair and honest election. As I have written in the past about elections and the process I won’t get into here, except that our votes don’t matter and that we do not live in a democracy. If we did the people’ who removed their votes would be counted. In this country though, the people who don’t vote are left behind. In reality only a very small percentage of the Canadian population actually voted in the last election and of them an even smaller number voted liberal.

You see in our country, we are forced to vote for a party, not an individual. So if you like the candidates objectives in your riding and vote for them then the party gets the seats in parliament. This means that the person who is head of that party gets to be PM of the country. If you don’t like the leader of the party but feel the only there is one candidate who falls in with your values or ideas of how the country should be run but hate the leader of that party, you really only have 2 choices. Vote anyway or not vote at all. Last election, the major portion of the population didn’t vote.

Now I know what your thinking. “Then vote and make a difference”. It doesn’t matter. After speaking with Elections Canada, they informed me that even if only 10 people in the whole country voted then then we would still have a PM and the government would still run.

That is NOT a democracy.

So again, Justin Trudeau does not represent Canadians or our values. His mindset is of third wave feminism which is about elevating women, giving them things like money, jobs, opportunities simply based on their gender instead of actually earning those things.

Recently he called for all Canadian’s to “embrace feminism and not be scared of it”. This caused an uproar in the comment section of every media source that printed an article about this.

Canadians’ do not like third wave feminism. Canadians believe in real equality, not the brand of equality that takes from men who have earned their money, job etc, and giving to to women simply because they are women. This brand of feminism goes against the original brand of feminism that was about women having the right to work along side men and earn the same money and the same promotions as men. Not be handed those positions, without earning or working for it, simply based on the the anatomy.

The original feminists who fought back in the 60’s speak out against this current crop of so called feminism.

In this country we believe in fair treatment. We believe if you work hard in your career, and put in the time, sweat and tears into your job then you deserve and should move up the ladder. You don’t get handed the board of directors position simply because you have a degree in gender studies.

To listen to our PM and see his efforts on behalf of feminism you would think we are all feminists, and we are definitely not. It’s time to call out third wave feminism by all. Time to call out the PM for pandering only to an ideal that puts men less than women instead of on equal footing. It’s time to shout down this nonsense from all sources, and stop this before it really becomes harmful on our society.

Canada used to be peacekeepers, and the majority of us still believe we can be this again.
Canada used to be accepting of other cultures and groups. We believe we can be this again.

Canada used to accept all religions and faiths and we believe we can be this again.

Don’t let Justin Trudeau’s face fool you. He is on a leash being controlled by third wave feminism, and he doesn’t speak for us.

And Justin, if you are reading this, understand this, you are a tool for the feminists. You are not a feminist. They will throw you under the bus the minute you are no longer a use to them. A man cannot be a feminist, that is like a black person supporting the slavery of black people. Stop pandering to them and start representing Canada. The real Canada. Otherwise you may lose your job.